Anneke Zuiderwijk et al.
2. 2.1.
Alignment dynamics Alignment as a process
In this paper we build on the alignment perspective which points out the importance of attuning the organization and technologyand the precarious balance between both. Initially, this idea of alignment was developed for application within a business context, but alignment models are increasingly applied in the context of the adoption of technology by governments (e.g. Fedorowicz, Gelinas, Gogan, and Williams 2009, Meijer 2010). Like businesses, governments are also challenged to harmonize their organization’s goals and activities and the information systems that support them (McKeen and Smith 2003, Chan and Reich 2007). Consequently, they experience a similar need for aligning their organizational and technology dimensions. Alignment within governmental organizations can be seen as a condition for achieving a better functioning and a more efficiently managed organization. It is a dynamic and ongoing process (Baets 1996, Rondinelli, Rosen and Drori 2001, Chan and Reich 2007) with different dimensions, such as strategic and structural dimensions, but also social and cultural elements (Chan and Reich 2007). Attempts have been made to identify factors that contribute to this alignment of organization and technology (e.g. Luftman 2003). But insights into the complexity of this alignment process and the elements that contribute or hinder this process tend to be rather limited. There is a need for insights into the complex and dynamic process of alignment and in different elements that contribute to this alignment process. Baets (1996) summarizes this by stating that “it is not enough to simply understand the factors involved in alignment, one must understand the interrelationships among the factors” (Chan and Reich 2007). We elaborate on this idea of aligning organization and technology and aim for a better understanding of this process of alignment by building on the 7Smodel. This model is traditionally used for addressing how organizations deal with change and on how effective they are in this. The founding fathers of this model, Peters & Waterman (1980) distinguish seven factors that are interrelated and mutually reinforcing. These elements include both hard dimensions such as ‘strategy’, ‘structure’ and ‘systems’ but also soft dimensions such as ‘style’, ‘staff’, ‘skills’ and ‘shared values’. By reviewing these seven elements we aim to contribute to the alignment literature by illustrating how alignment dynamics work and can be investigated in local governments.
2.2.
Alignment strategies in local governments
Local governments differ notably in the way they make use of technology within their everyday functioning. Boudry et al (2009) demonstrate this by introducing a new type of classification that enables to evaluate the alignment status of local governments. The authors discriminate four ways in which local governments align both their organizational and their technology dimension. Two ways concern organizations that are aligned, the other two cover organizations that are not or ‘disaligned’. Aligned organizations (quadrant II and III) can be characterized by either a strong or a weak alignment. ‘Strong aligned organizations’ (quadrant II) succeed in a positive collaboration between the organizational and technology dimensions. They reinforce and challenge each other in becoming a better organization. In ‘weak aligned organizations’ (quadrant III) both the organization and the technology side lack the driving power to initiate any substantial changes. To a certain extent, they reinforce each other in a negative way and leave each other uninspired. In ‘disaligned organizations’ (quadrant I and IV) the organization and technology sides do not sufficiently join forces. The reasons for this mismatch can be twofold. On the one hand, there are progressive organizations that do not get the support they need from their very technical-oriented IT department (quadrant IV). On the other hand, the opposite occurs when rather conservative organizations are too much steered by a strong IT department, which leads to an unbalanced growth of their organization (quadrant I). In short, technology and the organization do not necessarily evolve at the same pace, but technology can outrun the organization and vice versa. These findings should be seen as a snapshot of a process that illustrates that organization and technology can move in a different pace resulting in a time lag between business and IT planning processes also described by Van Der Zee and De Jong (1999).
www.ejeg.com
173
ISSN 1479-439X